@punker barbie @AmberCutie Look at this and tell me this is not a scam. Thanks to the new message system I can prove that I was never pressuring anyone. We agreed to pvt and she banned me like 3 minutes AFTER starting. TO MY SURPRISE, THE TOKENS KEEP GOING TO HER EVEN IF I AM BANNED! As I am making this post, my tokens are going down for a "show" that I am not in at! I want my tokens back, and I am SURE this is what happened with the same model I made a post about the other day and got chewed out for about usename sharanphan. nataliamichelotti was going in and out of privates and I am sure she was banning everyone right after accepting. This is crazy! I took ANOTHER screenshot RIGHT after submitting this post, so you can see the time stamps.
AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
User nataliamichelotti scams and possible CB bug
- Thread starter reillior
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
Oh wow I should've seen that huh. Thanks.model1 ) body decorations : my beauteful eyes (he-he) and tattoo
model2 ) body decorations : my beauteful eyes (he-he) and pearcing
it's in the details
Upvote
0
That's a new one. Usually I have to resort to looking for signs of a job lot of mirrored headboards or identical golden elephant ornaments.model1 ) body decorations : my beauteful eyes (he-he) and tattoo
model2 ) body decorations : my beauteful eyes (he-he) and pearcing
it's in the details
Upvote
0
It sounded like you read that message as meaning the user was given the opportunity to pay the balance of tokens to end the private early.
I think the wording just confirms to the model that they still receive the full amount of tokens due them for the minimum duration of the show.
Reassurance that the user knowingly ended the show inside min duration, and the model still gets the min token total they set.
Just from that experience of doing it, when clicking to end the show, there was a prompt (are you sure?) but nothing about remaining tokens being charged.
Upvote
0
Because that's what happened. I've had it happen to me, though it's been a long time.
I can do a test with a certain someone if they happen to be online sometime in the near future. But it would absolutely defeat the entire purpose of the function of a minimum time setting if we didn't get the tokens when they bail early. It takes FOREVER to rebuild a room after private, which is why I set my rate very high to begin with and a five minute minimum (also less likely to get small players who do bail out the second a model doesn't immediately rail herself with three dildos at once).
Upvote
0
I definitely think we're at cross-purposes.
No argument the model gets the tokens owed if the user bails early.
I just don't think the user gets offered any choice, other than confirming they def want to end the show.
Upvote
0
I think this has changed recently. I'm pretty sure that if a viewer left a private show before the minimum time elapsed that the broadcaster had to wait in away mode for that time in order to get paid the minimum, i.e., it was an opportunity cost. Now, though, when a viewer leaves a private show early they are given the option of doing so at the cost for the remaining minimum time and the broadcaster can return to the public show right away which is a win for broadcasters since that opportunity cost has been eliminated:
However, if the viewer just leaves the room during private show, the broadcaster can stay in private show mode and the deductions will continue every 10 seconds until the minimum time elapses, at which point away mode starts automatically. That makes sense because consent was given to the minimum time but not to the one-time payout to end the private show early. If the minimum time has elapsed or there is no minimum time, if the viewer leaves the room then the private show automatically ends and goes to away mode, so that safeguard is in place.
I also tested the scenario if a user requests a private show with a minimum time and the broadcaster changes the minimum time during the request process. The change takes about 1.5 seconds to lock in, but it is reflected in the private request popup. However, that does leave room for scamming since it is more than likely that viewers won't see that change. And if banning a viewer has the same implication as the viewer leaving the room, i.e., the token transfers continue so long as the broadcaster stays in the private show, then it will absolutely be abused.
The only way that I've found for viewers to protect themselves in the short term from this kind of scam is to have two verified accounts and to immediately move all your remaining tokens to the other account if this happens. This could also be used, though, for viewers to hedge their bets with broadcasters and agree to a minimum time but then leave private shows early by moving their tokens to another account and not having to pay the remainder. I'm pretty sure this has happened before to a model I know.
A robust way of closing any loopholes would require three changes:
However, if the viewer just leaves the room during private show, the broadcaster can stay in private show mode and the deductions will continue every 10 seconds until the minimum time elapses, at which point away mode starts automatically. That makes sense because consent was given to the minimum time but not to the one-time payout to end the private show early. If the minimum time has elapsed or there is no minimum time, if the viewer leaves the room then the private show automatically ends and goes to away mode, so that safeguard is in place.
I also tested the scenario if a user requests a private show with a minimum time and the broadcaster changes the minimum time during the request process. The change takes about 1.5 seconds to lock in, but it is reflected in the private request popup. However, that does leave room for scamming since it is more than likely that viewers won't see that change. And if banning a viewer has the same implication as the viewer leaving the room, i.e., the token transfers continue so long as the broadcaster stays in the private show, then it will absolutely be abused.
The only way that I've found for viewers to protect themselves in the short term from this kind of scam is to have two verified accounts and to immediately move all your remaining tokens to the other account if this happens. This could also be used, though, for viewers to hedge their bets with broadcasters and agree to a minimum time but then leave private shows early by moving their tokens to another account and not having to pay the remainder. I'm pretty sure this has happened before to a model I know.
A robust way of closing any loopholes would require three changes:
- Locking the private show setting in when the viewer clicks "Start Private Show" and the request popup is displayed. Any changes by the broadcaster while the popup is displayed would only take effect for subsequent requests. If changes need to be made, the viewer can cancel the request, the broadcaster can make the changes, and then the viewer can open the request again.
- CB should hold tokens for minimum times in escrow since they are acting as the guarantor for the payments. This would eliminate viewers moving tokens to another account to avoid the minimum time payment.
- CB should be tracking and looking for patterns where broadcasters and studios are using bans to scam viewers.
Upvote
0
Well, that screenshot is interesting to see.
While it doesn't specifically state that agreeing to leave will deduct the remaining tokens all at once, I guess that's what does happen, and means the broadcaster can return to public rather than having to wait.
Is this update part of the recent changes?
(FWIW I'm glad the site now offers the ability to toggle between the 'new look' and the previous page layout, although I only got the new look on Chrome, not on Firefox).
While it doesn't specifically state that agreeing to leave will deduct the remaining tokens all at once, I guess that's what does happen, and means the broadcaster can return to public rather than having to wait.
Is this update part of the recent changes?
(FWIW I'm glad the site now offers the ability to toggle between the 'new look' and the previous page layout, although I only got the new look on Chrome, not on Firefox).
Upvote
0
Why is this screenshot more reliable to you than the one I posted from two years ago from the broadcaster's view point?
Upvote
0
Because the one you posted was a chat notification the model sees, and the one above is what the user sees as a decision prompt.
Upvote
0
Yes, it does deduct the tokens immediately if you click "Leave". My knowledge of how it worked before was based on what models I knew told me rather than directly experimenting with it, so don't hold me to the statement that previously broadcasters had to stay in away model to collect the balance for minimum time. But my guess is that the change was made when they rolled out premium private shows and the other private show changes.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Question